By extending the last argument we can also see why

Info iconThis preview shows page 1. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Unformatted text preview: ) N (t0 ). The desired result now follows by induction. We are now ready for our second definition. It is in terms of the process {N (s) : s 0} that counts the number of arrivals in [0, s]. Theorem 2.7. If {N (s), s 0} is a Poisson process, then (i) N (0) = 0, (ii) N (t + s) N (s) = Poisson( t), and (iii) N (t) has independent increments. Conversely, if (i), (ii), and (iii) hold, then {N (s), s 0} is a Poisson process. Why is this true? Clearly, (i) holds. Lemmas 2.2 and 2.6 prove (ii) and (iii). To start to prove the converse, let Tn be the time of the nth arrival. The first arrival occurs after time t if and only if there were no arrivals in [0, t]. So using the formula for the Poisson distribution P (⌧1 > t) = P (N (t) = 0) = e t 83 2.2. DEFINING THE POISSON PROCESS This shows that ⌧1 = T1 is exponential( ). For ⌧2 = T2 T1 we note that P (⌧2 > t|⌧1 = s) = P ( no arrival in (s, s + t] |⌧1 = s) = P (N (t + s) = P (N (t + s) N (s) = 0|N (r) = 0 for r < s, N (s) = 1) N (s) = 0) =...
View Full Document

This document was uploaded on 03/06/2014 for the course MATH 4740 at Cornell.

Ask a homework question - tutors are online